Just like the Lions' running game in 2011, a unit decimated by injuries will often struggle. Leshoure gets back and *poof* we run efficiently. Did the run-blocking suddenly improve? Did we switch Olines on running plays?

No. We just have better players on the field.

We are missing a group of starters from our secondary... we can't possibly expect the unit to perform well. Entering the season, Wendling was our "strong STer" and Lacey was our distant depth at CB. Both are seeing starting snaps. That's not a recipe for success.

We're fine. We competed with the 49ers up until the very end, even with Stafford having an off-game. Despite 21 'odd', flukey points against the Titans, we faced 4th and 1 in the red zone in OT.

Just like the Lions' running game in 2011, a unit decimated by injuries will often struggle. Leshoure gets back and *poof* we run efficiently. Did the run-blocking suddenly improve? Did we switch Olines on running plays?

No. We just have better players on the field.

We are missing a group of starters from our secondary... we can't possibly expect the unit to perform well. Entering the season, Wendling was our "strong STer" and Lacey was our distant depth at CB. Both are seeing starting snaps. That's not a recipe for success.

We're fine. We competed with the 49ers up until the very end, even with Stafford having an off-game. Despite 21 'odd', flukey points against the Titans, we faced 4th and 1 in the red zone in OT.

Despite our substantial flaws, we're fine.

We had Bentley and Houston back for the Tennessee game. Only Delmas was missing. Other than that, literally all of our starters were in the game.

Besides, it doesn't matter if your starters are in if your depth is terrible, because there's always going to be that weakness teams can exploit. It's not like we're always going to be in our base personnel. At some point, Jacob Lacey is going to be covering James Jones or Randall Cobb or Jermichael Finley--how can you feel good about that matchup?_________________

MrDrew wrote:

I may have to find a taxidermist that will make me a koozie out of a squirrel in a kilt now.

Just like the Lions' running game in 2011, a unit decimated by injuries will often struggle. Leshoure gets back and *poof* we run efficiently. Did the run-blocking suddenly improve? Did we switch Olines on running plays?

No. We just have better players on the field.

We are missing a group of starters from our secondary... we can't possibly expect the unit to perform well. Entering the season, Wendling was our "strong STer" and Lacey was our distant depth at CB. Both are seeing starting snaps. That's not a recipe for success.

We're fine. We competed with the 49ers up until the very end, even with Stafford having an off-game. Despite 21 'odd', flukey points against the Titans, we faced 4th and 1 in the red zone in OT.

Despite our substantial flaws, we're fine.

We had Bentley and Houston back for the Tennessee game. Only Delmas was missing. Other than that, literally all of our starters were in the game.

Besides, it doesn't matter if your starters are in if your depth is terrible, because there's always going to be that weakness teams can exploit. It's not like we're always going to be in our base personnel. At some point, Jacob Lacey is going to be covering James Jones or Randall Cobb or Jermichael Finley--how can you feel good about that matchup?

Coincidentally, Lacey and Wendling (two backups) were the ones abused on the Washington 70 yard INT. Coleman allowed the Cook TD (and Spievey provided poor support), so count that one against the 'regular players'. That's one big defensive play allowed by our regular personnel.

We can't grade our secondary against the deepest WR corps in the NFL. We can't expect to have 5 solid starters at CB, and criticize the organization because we can't match up with the Packers. Jacob Lacey as a #4 is far better than Jacob Lacey as our #2. It's just... a world of difference._________________

Just like the Lions' running game in 2011, a unit decimated by injuries will often struggle. Leshoure gets back and *poof* we run efficiently. Did the run-blocking suddenly improve? Did we switch Olines on running plays?

No. We just have better players on the field.

We are missing a group of starters from our secondary... we can't possibly expect the unit to perform well. Entering the season, Wendling was our "strong STer" and Lacey was our distant depth at CB. Both are seeing starting snaps. That's not a recipe for success.

We're fine. We competed with the 49ers up until the very end, even with Stafford having an off-game. Despite 21 'odd', flukey points against the Titans, we faced 4th and 1 in the red zone in OT.

Despite our substantial flaws, we're fine.

We had Bentley and Houston back for the Tennessee game. Only Delmas was missing. Other than that, literally all of our starters were in the game.

Besides, it doesn't matter if your starters are in if your depth is terrible, because there's always going to be that weakness teams can exploit. It's not like we're always going to be in our base personnel. At some point, Jacob Lacey is going to be covering James Jones or Randall Cobb or Jermichael Finley--how can you feel good about that matchup?

Coincidentally, Lacey and Wendling (two backups) were the ones abused on the Washington 70 yard INT. Coleman allowed the Cook TD (and Spievey provided poor support), so count that one against the 'regular players'. That's one big defensive play allowed.

We can't grade our secondary against the deepest WR corps in the NFL. We can't expect to have 5 solid starters at CB, and criticize the organization because we can't match up with the Packers. Jacob Lacey as a #4 is far better than Jacob Lacey as our #2. It's just... a world of difference.

That's my point, though. Lacey is going to be on the field a lot regardless of whether or not he's starting. It's not like Nate Washington or Jared Cook are NFL superstars. Washington's a pretty average #2, and Cook--while talented--is no Jimmy Graham. No, you can't expect the team's #5 CB to be a starting caliber player, but like I said, we weren't missing any starters at CB, so straight up it was a depth-against-depth matchup, and our depth lost to theirs. Badly. Obviously you'd like to has Delmas in there instead of Wendling, but is he going to be the difference between giving up almost 400 passing yards and a solid showing? I don't know about that. He's not Troy Polamalu._________________

MrDrew wrote:

I may have to find a taxidermist that will make me a koozie out of a squirrel in a kilt now.

That's my point, though. Lacey is going to be on the field a lot regardless of whether or not he's starting. It's not like Nate Washington or Jared Cook are NFL superstars. Washington's a pretty average #2, and Cook--while talented--is no Jimmy Graham. No, you can't expect the team's #5 CB to be a starting caliber player, but like I said, we weren't missing any starters at CB, so straight up it was a depth-against-depth matchup, and our depth lost to theirs. Badly. Obviously you'd like to has Delmas in there instead of Wendling, but is he going to be the difference between giving up almost 400 passing yards and a solid showing? I don't know about that. He's not Troy Polamalu.

That's my point, though. Lacey is going to be on the field a lot regardless of whether or not he's starting. It's not like Nate Washington or Jared Cook are NFL superstars. Washington's a pretty average #2, and Cook--while talented--is no Jimmy Graham. No, you can't expect the team's #5 CB to be a starting caliber player, but like I said, we weren't missing any starters at CB, so straight up it was a depth-against-depth matchup, and our depth lost to theirs. Badly. Obviously you'd like to has Delmas in there instead of Wendling, but is he going to be the difference between giving up almost 400 passing yards and a solid showing? I don't know about that. He's not Troy Polamalu.

Does anyone else find it strange that Lawrence Jackson was a healthy scratch, but we dressed 5 running backs....and our defensive line put on almost zero pressure. This is what makes me wonder about our coaching staff. Shouldn't they put the best players on the field. Vanden Bosch, Young, and Avril all struggled; maybe Jackson could have played better. At least if he was active they could have tried. I feel like our coaches give too much loyalty to players and too much loyalty to their game plan and it hurts the players. They seem to spend more time seeing what strengths of the Lions another team will try to exploit than actually seeing if they can exploit it. Like Calvin Johnson with 1 reception in the first half, because they just thought they'd take him away. The same with the 49ers game. The coaches faith in their systems seems to trump admitting they need to change. We are not to that point yet as a football team. Why the Lions continue to play to other teams strengths is beyond me. Schwartz keep saying they need to play better on offense, defense, and special teams, but what he really needs to emphasize that we need to play 4 quarters of better football, and the coaches need to allow them to play better in all 4 quarters in all phases. This team is far from perfect, but they have talent, the coaches need to maximize that talent by playing the best players and realizing that change may be necessary if things aren't working.
-End rant-

I hate when people discuss our game they talk about how bad our defense is. We had a solid defense before this game and during this game our special teams and offense gave up 21 points. On top of that, 1 play blew up for 70 yards against our D. The rest of the game we were not that bad. But people say, their D is awful, they gave up 44 points.

The pass defense was ranked 6th in the NFL after the first two games.

Because we played Alex Smith and Sam Bradford. Neither of those guys air it out a lot. But when they did pass, the defense gave up easy pickings--both had passing efficiencies above 100. Detroit is 29th in opponents' passer rating, and we're one of only three teams that has yes to record an interception.

Our defense is pretty bad; I don't think you can really argue otherwise. Yeah, there's the "one play blew up for 70 yards" argument, but there was also another one that went for 60+ (Jared Cook's TD). Good defenses don't give up multiple huge scoring plays like that. Jake Locker went for 378 yards, hitting almost 70% of his throws in the process. Jake Locker is one of the NFL's worst starters until he proves otherwise, but he looked like prime Peyton Manning against us. And, even if the defense "only" allowed 21 points, that's still about as many as the Titans scored in weeks 1 and 2 combined. We got zero sacks against a pretty terrible defensive line.

This is coming off a week in which the 49ers ran for 5.5 yards a carry against us, and Alex Smith had similar efficiency numbers to those of Locker. Third downs were easily there for the taking, and the 49ers never really had trouble keeping the clock moving or sustaining drives. Bradford didn't exactly light it up against us, but then again he only passed 25 times. Really, the only solid thing we've done defensively all year is to stymy Steven Jackson, which shouldn't be considered entirely impressive considering he looks like he's pretty much done as an NFL starter.

This team still needs tons of help on defense.

I completely agree with you. I just wanted to be able to say that our defense was ranked 6th in pass defense while I could. It's going to be a while before I get to say something like that again. _________________FFMD 2015: Detroit Lions AGM
Adopt-A-Lion: Calvin Johnson
Adopt-A-Lion: Stylish313

It is. Sometimes it almost seems like they would be better off playing six defensive lineman and simply having the linebackers drop back when required to help the safeties. I know it wouldn't work but using CB's hasn't helped either._________________

It is. Sometimes it almost seems like they would be better off playing six defensive lineman and simply having the linebackers drop back when required to help the safeties. I know it wouldn't work but using CB's hasn't helped either.

Even though I'm sure it isn't a strong-pont for them I feel they would be better off just playing at the LOS at least make the QB go through progressions and buy time for the line._________________Team Stylish

I finally have my hands on this game. Here are my first quarter impressions:

- The DLine is getting a good jump, but the Titans are getting rid of the ball extremely quickly.
- Leshoure looks great.
- The biggest problem with the offense this season is getting TDs instead of FGs. If we continue to rely on FGs, we will lose many games this season.
- Graham's injury had everything to do with the punt return TD: you can tell the ball was much shorter than it should have been, giving the Titans' return team time to make that play.

Overall, the team looks pretty good. Just bad circumstances and a failure to finish._________________